Ethical Issues In Foxconn

As the world trends towards a more globalized marketplace, the need for a universal definition of suitable ethical standards and corporate social responsibility is imperative due to the recent upsurge in global welfare issues. If successful, every facet of the business and supply chain would concentrate on not only the maximization of wealth, but the well-being of all stakeholders. Until such time, many multinational corporations (MNCs) are continuing to encounter human rights issues resulting from unethical actions from overseas suppliers that conflict with their own code of conduct. These adverse engagements have been shown to cause significant damage and guilt by association to MNCs even though they do not directly oversee their suppliers’

Further investigations revealed Foxconn had been guilty of unsafe and unfair working environments long before the incidents, which included the employment of extended working hours, discrimination, and military management techniques (Xu & Li, 2013). Due to Foxconn’s sole focus on maintaining businesses relationships by fulfilling Apple’s demand of technical products, their subsequent mistreatment of employees was exacerbated and generated 80-100 hours of forced overtime per week (Xu & Li, 2013). However, in an attempt to combat the negative publicity, each firm denied responsibility for the incidents, which ultimately added fuel to the media fire (Xu & Li, 2013). Since then, each firm has enacted superior regulations designed to maintain efficiency while recognizing limitations on labor hours and increased spending on compliance audits (Chandler & Werther, 2014). Yet, as Foxconn continues to sustain their global leadership and Apple’s profits remain unaffected, the disadvantages associated with the incidents at Foxconn have not transcended the outcomes. From a profit standpoint, the increase in spending and subsequent alterations of labor methods serve as the biggest disadvantage to each company’s bottom line. However, after both companies attempted to negate blame, their ensuing developments indicate assuming responsibility was the best avenue to recoup reputation issues and focus on long-term growth. Therefore, the greatest advantage for both companies was their heightened reputation resulting from increased transparency and the employment of business models focused on the welfare of all supply chain